ukcanuck wrote:...expansion had started before Bettman, but Bettman took it to another level with 6 new teams including Columbus, Nashville and Atlanta.

Ohio is in the south?

Nashville has very strong community support and is beginning to turn the corner.

Atlanta was horribly managed and should have folded instead if burdening the 'pig.

ukcanuck wrote:The revenue sharing under the old CBA was a misnomer. Equalization for the Canadian dollar helped Edmonton and Calgary and maybe Ottawa but Vancouver was never in serious trouble as a result of the exchange rate.

The Tacoma Domes.

ukcanuck wrote:The kind of revenue sharing the league needed to make the Cap and 50/ 50 split a fair deal has never been a serious part of the NHL's position...

I realise that the NFL has a TV contract and Gambling revenues that the NHL could only dream about, but then Salaries, Roster sizes would be an NHLPA wet dream... not to mention the costs of those monolithic size stadiums...

The point is the system in the NFL is a real attempt to level the financial playing field where the NHL's pays lip service.

Lancer wrote:Bettman's trying to make the league idiot-proof so even the retards down south can make a go of it without even trying while the players shut their blue-collars pie-holes, thankful for the peanut crumbs they get for playing hockey.

As my link above indicates, Gary had a mandate upon being named commissioner to make the league "idiot-proof".

Strangelove wrote:Actually there were only 4 expansion teams approved by Bettman: Columbus, Nashville, Atlanta, and Minnesota.

(in Dec 1992 Florida and Anaheim were awarded franchises for the 1993-94 season)

(Lord Bettman was not hired until February 1, 1993).

"Led by Lord Bettman, the league focused expansion and relocation efforts during the rest of the 1990s on the American South, working to expand the league's footprint across the country. The Nashville Predators (1998), Atlanta Thrashers (1999), Minnesota Wild (2000) and Columbus Blue Jackets (2000) completed this expansion period, bringing the NHL to 30 teams. In addition, four franchises relocated during the 1990s under Bettman: The Minnesota North Stars to Dallas (1993), the Quebec Nordiques to Denver (1995), the Winnipeg Jets to Phoenix (1996) and the Hartford Whalers to North Carolina (1997)."

OK technically 4 expansion teams but the "move south" is pretty much self evident and is a mixed bag at best, ( kind a sucky for Quebec and Winnipeg...)

ukcanuck you want a free market with no cap anyways.... why the fuck do you care about Winnipeg and Quebec getting screwed last time ? Talking out of both sides of your mouth if you think those teams can make a go of it for any length of time in a free market with no cap. Those teams were moved when the Northern Peso was worth 60 cents.

Topper wrote:^ Back in September or October I was the one who suggested folding the Coyotes as a hardline bargaining tactic. I think the PA would fight tooth and nail against contraction and the job losses that would result.

I don't think anybody wants to see contraction - not when there are a number of other locations who would line up to take the team elsewhere.

Thing is, the league Buttman envisions is like Bizzaro-socialism - there is no incentive for the owners to work harder to improve their product on the ice or innovate to make their operations more viable because they're guaranteed playoff gate receipts or high draft picks. He's trying to make the league idiot-proof so even the retards down south can make a go of it without even trying while the players shut their blue-collars pie-holes, thankful for the peanut crumbs they get for playing hockey. Jacobs and company get to laugh their asses off all the way to the bank

+1The peanut crumbs being relative to the peanut shells Walmart pays its greeters of course ...

How many penaut crumbs do you rake in as a greeter ? Enough to fill a mini cooper........a yugo ? Speak up man !

Blob Mckenzie wrote:ukcanuck you want a free market with no cap anyways.... why the fuck do you care about Winnipeg and Quebec getting screwed last time ? Talking out of both sides of your mouth if you think those teams can make a go of it for any length of time in a free market with no cap. Those teams were moved when the Northern Peso was worth 60 cents.

I guess the reason I get a little bitter is cause when little kids had their piggy bamks out, they (Bettman) shrugged and said its business...Well the same sauce cooks the goose I figure. I don't see why shitty owners and GMs should be saved from themselves. free enterprise is free enterprise, and just so you don't continue to think i got my nose up the players ass, I don't care at all about the lost jobs. Like Doc says they are one percenters anyway.

ukcanuck wrote:OK technically 4 expansion teams but the "move south" is pretty much self evident and is a mixed bag at best, ( kind a sucky for Quebec and Winnipeg...)

So you concur... Bettman is doing a very good job?

Wot with his mandate including "selling the product in television's mainstream (US) marketplace".

BTW, i figure he earns more money from July through September each year than you'll earn in your lifetime

(I'm on a math kick today).

Yeah, he pulls in Sidney Crosby money.

Sounds right, after all they're both superstars amirite?

Course Sid's career will undoubtedly be a lot shorter....

Well I don't think anyone could make a silk purse out of a pigs ear when it comes to creating a TV market for hockey in some of those American markets so i'll cut him some slack there. I also think moving into those southern markets was worth a try, I just wonder why he's sticking to Phoenix with such a death grip?I also think that Hockey is a white man's game and Black and latino America will always be a hard sell...

As for Bettman himself... He's a smart mofo and must be an intimidating man to corral such heavy hitters as Jacobs and Wirtz ...he's got my respect that way... but then I think the same about Fehr too

lol hey maybe Jimmy and Billy will build a arena for Katz... is Billy even alive anymore...I hear beer bellies are bad for the heart?

F*ck me how peanuts became the new flavour of the conversation here...

As for me pulling my head out of my ass, Blobby, the language used was relative. I'm pretty sure if Buttman and Co. had their way, they'd pay players minimum wage and have them handing out programs and fixing light bulbs over the ice before suiting up... and still charge the paying fan the same admission price. That's how plutocrats roll.

I guess you have no sympathy for anybody making more than you if they're not entrepenurial capitalists. I guess actors and actresses in Hollywood should get minimum wage with no benefits because, after all, what do they do that auto mechanic Al can't do and he has to work for what the boss man will give him? If the university-educated wage slave (and I'm one) has to struggle to make ends meet when his employer doesn't give a damn if he lives or dies (and I've come across more than a few) so long as he makes a profit, then why should said wage slave have any sympathy for the 'over-paid crybabies' that play a sport for a living, no?

Fact of the matter is, when supply and demand for a product (professional hockey) creates a multi-billion dollar industry off the backs of dedicated, talented professionals, then why should the plutocrats in charge of the league be defended and the players villified when the people who create the profit ask for their fair share and the ability to make as much as they can?

Rant on that front over.

My argument is that the league's position will hurt the product for fans in strong markets whose owners are willing to ice as competitive team as possible, in favour of league-manipulated mediocrity under the facade of a 'level playing field'. Did a salary cap help Canadian teams in the 90s when the exchange rate sucked, or was it an early form of revenue sharing? Where was Buttman and his 'level playing field' when Canadian teams folded and went to - how serendipitous - major US TV markets in strategic places. Funny how things have changed once the failed experiment has been shown to reek.

If the presence of NHL franchises has increased US participation in the sport in non-traditional regions, then bully for enhancing the game. Who should soak up the red ink for those flailing franchises in non-traditional regions until true hockey markets evolve - the players through wage slashes, or richer teams sharing revenue with expansion teams in said non-traditional regions (keeping in mind the nice expansion fees said richer teams pocketed)?

I'm with UK on having no sympathy for the Anaheims and Columbuses when it comes to crying poor. If Buttman cared, he would make Jacobs, Snyder and MLSE fork out to keep the league composition intact but hey, as long as they outbid the KHL they'll squeeze the players - the easy solution.

Bottom line, Buttman's vision of the league hurts the Canucks' ability to put the best product on the ice and reinforces mediocrity in favour of teams in whom he has a special vested interest - and Canadian teams are not among them. Selfish motivation, but whatever CBA hurts the Canucks' ability to ice a championship team before the Twins hang it up will find no fan in me.